User Tag List

First 234

Results 31 to 32 of 32

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009


    Feeling and thinking are equally important. I have a theory which says that both thinking and feeling will lead to the same right conclusion when applied correctly and in a mature manner.

    The misconception about the 'feeling people' ( the irrational reactions) stem from the impulse decision making based on an emotion. I think that feelers are very well aware of this impulse response (characterized as 'irrational feeling') and they work to balance/overcome/suppress it in their own way. This misconception is not seen as much with thinkers because the basic block of thought (which is natural to thinkers) can usually be expressed with words. So thinkers usually use their words to respond - which, to you and I, appear as 'reasons'.

    This only means that our vocabulary isn't yet evolved enough to be of use to feelers. So they fall back on the closest lexicon that can capture their feelings - "I don't like it" or "I hate him".

    I think this is true because if you give feelers enough time, 1-2 weeks where the can busy themselves with other tasks and let the subconscious figure it out - they will usually be able to give you a very exact reason for what was happening that day.

    But OP's main notion of critical thought still applies - what is described above are tools to do it.

    A feeler's reaction to a stimuli and it's critical thought is further complicated by the resulting emotions - anger, jealousy, hurt, etc. To a thinker, these emotions are just consequences. He is able to step back from the anger he is emoting and able to use his tool of thinking to examine the situation objectively. A feeler is disadvantaged because the tools that he uses to examine the situation are [i] also of the (feeling) kind! So before he can be critical about the situation, he first needs to learn how to separate these emotions from the feelings that were the result of the impulse response.

    Then there are other factors to take into account like maturity.

    Of course this is all anecdotal, I'm a thinker through and through. I don't know how to use the tools of feelings, I can only experience them as emotions.

  2. #32
    Senior Member StrawMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010


    Quote Originally Posted by CuriousFeeling View Post
    For thinkers, I think it depends on what their feeling cognitive process is. If someone is more Fe oriented (ENTP, ESTP, for instance), their decisions would be made based on group dynamics, organizing a group to adhere to their vision, and whether or not that vision would benefit the group. It's a way of making sure their ideas are marketable to others. This is just my personal explanation for it, not sure if this applies to you, so feel free to add onto this, or subtract points.
    I think it also depends on thinking cognitive processes. I surely take into consideration benefiting the group and group dynamics, but I would say I also use Ti in building a value system. The goal is to build a coherent system applicaple in most situations, starting from some basic values, like benefit for people (relevant people or very large group of people), justness and fairness, equality, maximum freedom and so on. I guess it's a feeling-based judgment though why certain values end up appearing more important than others?

    As for feelers, their main mode of judgment comes from value based judgments. In the end, I tend to focus on the implications that my decisions have on others as well as myself, what I feel is the right thing to do to benefit both myself and the person involved in the action I will choose. The logic behind it is "how will this person feel if I did A to them?" "How will I feel as a result?" "Is this the correct mode of action?" "I want this decision to benefit the greater good of all people involved." It seems more concerned about the welfare of others involved, if this makes sense. It's the primary mindframe.
    I have a tendency to first build a sort of "universal" value framework, which is then fine-tuned for varying situations. Partly based on similar considerations than that you mentioned, "how will this person feel if I did A to them?", "how much do I change my behaviour from how I would typically treat people in this kind of situation?", "how would my behaviour benefit the good of all people involved?". I'm also heavily concerned about the welfare of others, but there comes a point, where interests of people come into conflict, and there I would lean more on fairness than keeping all people involved happy.

Similar Threads

  1. [ESTJ] ESTJ Father, looking for your opinions.
    By Angry Ayrab in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 07-31-2011, 09:13 PM
  2. [NF] NFs: What Is Your Opinion of "What Not to Wear"?
    By kiddykat in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 12-07-2008, 06:42 PM
  3. [MBTItm] INTJ + INFJ relationships. Ladies, your opinions please?
    By Wyst in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-11-2008, 12:21 PM
  4. Israel: your opinion?
    By MerkW in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 97
    Last Post: 04-07-2008, 02:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO